Why Traditional Security Approaches Fail

Traditional application security approaches prove inadequate for managing dependency risks. Manual code reviews, even when performed by security experts, cannot effectively analyze the millions of lines of code in typical dependency trees. The volume overwhelms human capacity, and the rate of change means reviews become outdated quickly. Expecting developers to manually track vulnerabilities across hundreds of dependencies is unrealistic and error-prone.

Perimeter-based security models assume threats come from outside, but dependencies bring risk inside the trusted boundary. Network firewalls, intrusion detection systems, and similar controls don't address vulnerabilities in application code. Web application firewalls might block some exploit attempts but can't fix the underlying vulnerable components. Traditional security controls were designed for a different era with different threat models.

Periodic security assessments, whether penetration tests or vulnerability scans, provide point-in-time snapshots that quickly become outdated. New vulnerabilities are discovered daily in existing components. Dependency updates happen continuously in active projects. The dynamic nature of both threats and applications means that periodic assessments miss the continuous risk dependency management requires. Organizations need continuous, automated approaches that match the pace of modern development.